| Revision as of 03:15, 28 January 2013 editLegobot (talk | contribs)Bots1,669,043 editsm BOT: Adding |oldid=535128229 to {{GA}}← Previous edit |
Revision as of 08:08, 28 January 2013 edit undoChiswick Chap (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Page movers, New page reviewers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers296,635 edits Archiving...Next edit → |
| Line 19: |
Line 19: |
|
==Archives== |
|
==Archives== |
|
|
|
|
|
] ] |
|
] ] ] |
|
<!-- |
|
|
{{Talk:Military camouflage/GA1}} |
|
|
--> |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Talk:Military camouflage/GA1}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Some comments == |
|
|
|
|
|
Some suggestions/proposals for the lead: |
|
|
|
|
|
1. <s>The 1st 2 sentences of the lead don't clearly define the subject - is it just visual or does it include radar, IR etc ? The lead sentence should have a link to ]. Maybe something more like "'''Military camouflage''' is the use of ] by a ] to conceal personnel and equipment from visual observation by enemy forces..."</s> Done. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. <s>Would a lead pic with some background be better (e.g. File:Arw4.jpg) ?</s> Good idea, done. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. <s>I think the lead is still a bit too long (for the size of the article). For example the "previously known as" bit, which is specific to (British?) English probably shouldn't be in the lead (especially if it's not elsewhere in the article) - maybe a separate Etymology section.</s> Shortened, removed the prev. bit. |
|
|
|
|
|
4. <s>"camouflage" is in italics which means I'd expect it to be linked to an article about the word ''camouflage'' (e.g. on wiktionary).</s> Yes, done. |
|
|
|
|
|
5. <s>"military camouflage was first practised in the mid 18th century" ... "Camouflage was developed for military use ... in 1915" is contradictory.</s> Thanks, clarified first baby steps, extensive development. ] (]) 20:39, 19 January 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 20:21, 19 January 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
--- Thanks, very helpful. ] (]) 21:59, 19 January 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
More comments: |
|
|
|
|
|
1.a) Would it be better to put the Fashion&Art section into separate article(s) ? Advantages include avoiding duplication with the ] article and that the article(s) could be in fashion/art categories/templates. |
|
|
::--- Camouflage is basically the parent article, meant to have a summary of mil cam but not to replace it, so some overlap is correct; if anything, we should therefore have more here, not less, though I think there's basically enough to serve here. Since the fashion and art are specifically in reaction to mil cam, they properly belong here, and even if (looking down now, not up) they are split off as sub-articles one day, we'll still want about this much here to show how the sub-articles fit in. |
|
|
|
|
|
b)<s>To me the 1919 pic looks out of place on this article.</s> |
|
|
::--- Clarified the caption to show the connection; and if the text is right, so is the image. |
|
|
|
|
|
c)<s>The "within three weeks" bit is uncited.</s> Removed. |
|
|
|
|
|
d)<s>The bit about Barbados etc begs the question "is this still the case?" - it needs a date.</s> Done, though inclusion is quite borderline. |
|
|
|
|
|
2. <s>is "authorlink=Jon Latimer" supposed to be visible ?</s> A | added. |
|
|
|
|
|
3. <s>There's an unusual example of camouflage at File:A-7D Corsairs 354th TFW at Korat 1972.JPG, not sure if it could be used here or the A.C. article.</s> Why not. |
|
|
|
|
|
4. <s>The article says "auditory ... camouflage is rare", but if "camouflage" includes minimising noise then it's common - e.g. subs, helos, AFVs, clothing - even the swimming style troops are encouraged to use.</s> Thanks, clarified - examples were already present, contradicting the claim. |
|
|
|
|
|
] (]) 20:35, 21 January 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
<s>Comment on digital camouflage: |
|
|
|
|
|
A sentence now reads: "Like Germany, the Soviet Union experimented with camouflage patterns, such as "TTsMKK" developed in early 1945, that are thought to be forerunners of modern digital textile patterns." The source, claim no such thing. It would be impossible anyway, since the pattern predates computers and pixelation with a good margin. I suggest either a better source or a rewording to something like "Pixelated shapes predate computer, already being used ..." or something to similar effect.</s> ] (]) 19:20, 24 January 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
: Thanks, good idea, para reworded and pattern described too. Not that being a non-computer forerunner is impossible, far from it, as this example proves! ] (]) 20:34, 24 January 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
::It depends on how you define "digital" I suppose. This article says digital camo is made with a computer, pixelated or not, so the TTsMKK very obviously can't bee seen as a digital camouflage. Then again, neither can O'Neill's camo. As it stands now, the two examples very nicely describe the root of modern pixelated designs, a major improvement over my original text! ] (]) 11:19, 26 January 2013 (UTC) |
|
|
::: Thanks! I think the key word is forerunner, but no, digital doesn't imply computers. See ]. ] (]) 11:33, 26 January 2013 (UTC) |
|
